Opinion
NO. 3:19-cv-00434
02-02-2021
DOUGLAS TORRENS, Plaintiff, v. BONNIE JACKS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 32), to which no Objections have been timely filed.
The failure to object to a report and recommendation releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Frias v. Frias, No. 2:18-cv-00076, 2019 WL 549506, at *2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985)); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at *1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) The district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Ashraf v. Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, Case No. 3:18-cv-0010, 2018 WL 6322332, at *3 (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 4, 2018). The district court should adopt the magistrate judge's findings and rulings to which no specific objection is filed. Id.
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the file. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved.
Accordingly, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 22) is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and failure to establish the elements of an Eighth Amendment violation claim.
The Clerk is directed to close the file. This Order shall constitute a final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
ELI RICHARDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE